Well, when the SFMTA doesn’t get the $61 million from the state and has to float bonds to cover the cost and appease the FTA and then the FTA turns around and doesn’t grant the full funding agreement – who will be stuck holding the crappy end of the stick? The everyday Muni rider who will see less service on buses and LRVs that break down more often. Actually, the everyday Muni rider will get that either way – central subway built or not.

Anonymous

I don’t understand why they aren’t putting a stop at Washington Square/North Beach on the Central Subway. I mean, okay, the thing is way over-priced … but if we’re going to do it, let’s at least make it much more practical by letting people get from downtown to North Beach. I cannot understand why we can get so close to this and just let it slip by.

mikesonn

It wasn’t designed for actual transportation use.

voltairesmistress

Politics probably explains the shortened central subway route, at least for now. I think the Telegraph Hill Dwellers and Supervisor Peskin may have threatened to block it. Eventually, the subway will get built through North Beach, Fisherman’s Wharf, the Marina, and possibly the Presidio Main Post area — a boon for tourists, but also for any resident wanting to go between northeast and southeast.

The economic importance of this line will become more evident as UCSF, Salesforce.com and other tenants build out the Mission Bay area and as the Moscone Convention center area expands. The build-out of denser housing in the previously neglected southeast neighborhoods means these folks will need a subway to Mission Bay and the downtown.

As for nobody riding it — that’s a fallacy. The problem with it will be overcrowding and too-short platforms/trains.

Ted King

The “Central Subway” (aka Slick Willie’s Sell-out) is :
A) A pencil-whipped mess (deep tunnel, no Market St. Stn., no Wash. Sq. Stn., etc.);
B) Follows the wrong route due in part to the missing Mission Creek bypass (which might finally get built – see the recent TIGER grant); and
C) NOT really needed had the SFMTA had the balls to put in a transit mall along Stockton and pro-transit signals along Fourth St.

The station designs for the CS / SWS have short platforms (so what happens when SFMTA / Muni wants to run longer trains ?), are missing an exit or two, require long walks to make a connection (e.g. the Union Square Stn. favors mole people), and incorporate a fundamental flaw that dates back to the building of BART.

What fundamental flaw ? The Muni Metro level in the Market St. Subway was designed for BART trains. The planners failed to redesign the high platforms to a low platform standard. This led to the use of the dual-mode LRV’s that have been an absolute bitch to maintain. And expensive high-platform stations in other parts of the city.

mikesonn

That comment is wrong on many fronts. First, Peskin, while on the board, was in favor of the CS. Also, the last station was always set for Chinatown – the matter of where to extract the boaring machine was the only matter up for debate.

2nd, the 3rd St corridor of Mission Bay and south had an actual downtown connection with the 15 bus. This also applies to Caltrain riders, as in Caltrain riders aren’t taking the 30/45 to get to FiDi, they are getting on the N. The CS will still force comuters to transfer (a horrible one at that) to the Market street lines at Union Square. If the SFMTA was serious about connecting Mission Bay to downtown, they would implement signal prioritization on EMB and speed up those lines.

The increased housing to the far south (Hunters Point, etc) already have service to Mission Bay via the very unreliable T line. Which, since it is so unreliable, no one rides it. However, the SFMTA did just win TIGER funds to build a turn around in Mission Bay to cut out points south and increase service from Mission Bay north. I’m sure the already underserved communities in D10 will really appreciate that.

As for Chinatown ridership, it’s a toss up really. I see it as many elderly riders either going to Market to catch BART or staying on the 8x to points on Bayshore not served by the T. Add in a 90 ft decent from Washington Street (the southern portion of Chinatown) and I think many riders will try the subway once and go back to the bus.

But this raises an interesting point of high operating costs of the CS and duplicate surface service. Obviously bus service will need to be cut on Stockton so now we have only a few less people trying to fit on a lot fewer buses. Not to mention the other areas of the city served by the 30/45 (North Beach, Marina, Cow Hollow, Russian Hill).

And as for adding a NB station, the SFMTA is walking a fine line publicly planning for future expansion before given the full funding from the Feds. They don’t look too kindly on that. And while we are on it, Republican congress and this is in Pelosi’s district. I’d assume they’d love to stick it to her. Federal funding was suppose to be guaranteed last year, and there is still no word when we will hear this year.

voltairesmistress

Mike, thanks for the clarification on Peskin’s position. I guess I can’t imagine relying on the Muni buses for traveling relatively long distances in heavy traffic. They stop too often, don’t have a dedicated lane free of turning cars, lack signal prioritization, and also lack pre-paid boarding. Just a lumbering, slow mess. Hoping the BRT shows us how to do everything better. I would support above ground fixes, if I had seen any by Muni that had already worked. I have not.

mikesonn

There are many, many people who miss the 15 bus. MANY. The T-line shows the failure that is SFMTA’s management of LRV.

Also, signal prioritization doesn’t have to stop at LRV (it would be nice if it even started).

I forgot to mention in my last post that Salesforce.com isn’t moving to Mission Bay, they are staying near the Ferry Building.

Anonymous

From the SF Appeal article- “SPUR hopes to convince the SFMTA to extend the subway another four-tenths of a mile with a study, funded by the nonprofit and conducted with help from SFMTA transit experts.”

That would put the tunnel portal outside the 365 Club just past Taylor & Chestnut, past most of the historic buildings and avoiding conflicts with the Powell-Mason cable car. Not a bad idea.

mikesonn

The “4/10th of a mile” is referring to the distance from Washington Street to Washington Square Park.

SPUR is on SFMTA’s payroll, I’m not sure how that really works – SPUR trying to convince SFMTA of something.

Anonymous

Ah, that makes sense. Still, this would be a good idea. It makes zero sense to permanently place a tunnel portal in the middle of a historic neighborhood park. Move it to a less visually appealing section of the street and avoid pissing off all the North Beach merchants. That is, after all, why the southern portal will be placed under I-80.

Hopefully Streetsblog will have some coverage of this tomorrow, but this guy hit a cyclist from behind in Dublin, killed him, and fled the scene, yet is only being charged with a *misdemeanor*! Then his attorney played the old blame-the-victim game: “”But one would never expect a bicyclist to be riding in the No. 2 lane
north on Dougherty Road at 11:30 at night. It’s just not a safe place
for riders.” Maybe, but that’s got absolutely nothing with said cyclist deserving to die! And certainly it doesn’t mean that you can flee the scene if you do hit said cyclist. This is just nuts.

mikesonn

The state is going to sell $61m in bonds for the CS. Now onto the Feds.